Should the flames of the endothermic fire be black?

[ArubaroBeefalo]

Just now, Pop Guy said:

True, black absorbs light radiation. But in the next sentence I emphasized the "aesthetic" and "dramatic" meaning of the choice. You didn't mention that part, immediately after and reiterated later

because that part is cover by night lights. I just wanted to clarify that black and fire, without magic, arent compatible

im not saying that it will not look good but you talked about black fire absorbing hot instead of blue absorbing hot because 

On 10/13/2020 at 3:40 PM, Pop Guy said:

In theory, blue flames are hotter than yellow flames. Instead, black flames could absorb the excess light radiation

and im explaining that in theory it is more complex that a color thing

later you talked about black holes..

[Pop Guy]

7 minutes ago, ArubaroBeefalo said:

because that part is cover by night lights. I just wanted to clarify that black and fire, without magic, arent compatible

im not saying that it will not look good but you talked about black fire absorbing hot instead of blue absorbing hot because 

and im explaining that in theory it is more complex that a color thing

later you talked about black holes..

Since in my mind there was an image of a black micro-hole that acted as an "endothermic fire"; I thought a similar concept could be "evoked" by means of black flames. After all, blue flames have no meaning in themselves (other than to evoke a generic and superficial idea of "cold"). So, if Klei had put black flames instead; in my opinion there would also have been a more evocative and conceptually interesting context (however absurd; but I repeat, I never spoke of realism): instead of generic "cold" blue flames (a concept in my opinion a bit superficial, but they are opinions) of black flames, a sort of unnatural "black hole" that cools the environment because it absorbs light radiation. In short, it seemed very suggestive and "cool"; but then people started talking about "confusion", "demonic concept" or "it doesn't make sense physically so better blue"; things that in my opinion had little to do with my intentions, in fact I replied little :]

[ArubaroBeefalo]

9 minutes ago, Pop Guy said:

Since in my mind there was an image of a black micro-hole that acted as an "endothermic fire"; I thought a similar concept could be "evoked" by means of black flames. After all, blue flames have no meaning in themselves (other than to evoke a generic and superficial idea of "cold"). So, if Klei had put black flames instead; in my opinion there would also have been a more evocative and conceptually interesting context (however absurd; but I repeat, I never spoke of realism): instead of generic "cold" blue flames (a concept in my opinion a bit superficial, but they are opinions) of black flames, a sort of unnatural "black hole" that cools the environment because it absorbs light radiation. In short, it seemed very suggestive and "cool"; but then people started talking about "confusion", "demonic concept" or "it doesn't make sense physically so better blue"; things that in my opinion had little to do with my intentions, in fact I replied little :]

well, isnt generic. In art exist cold colours and warm colours xD

black holes have radiation so you are at the same time saying to dont look after realism but justifing it with realism ¿?

i didnt want an argument, just clarify some physic missunderstoods

[Pop Guy]

9 minutes ago, ArubaroBeefalo said:

well, isnt generic. In art exist cold colours and warm colours xD

black holes have radiation so you are at the same time saying to dont look after realism but justifing it with realism ¿?

i didnt want an argument, just clarify some physic missunderstoods

I believe there is a difference between "evoking a concept", "giving an explanation" and "creating a realistic work of art."
Let me explain: if you want to make a realism work of art (film, book, comic, video game, etc.) then your hands are tied: you have to put real and plausible things into the work. Fortunately, this is not our case :'D
But assuming that a work is "magical" or "supernatural", this does not mean that you cannot give explanations.
After all, it's usually not nice to look at something, ask a question, and be told "why yes!"
In the end, the endothermic fire is blue ... why yes. Or rather, because, meta-narratively, the viewer has a generic idea of cold associated with blue.
There is nothing wrong with that, Klei did well.
But perhaps a more interesting explanation could be given. Not real; more complex, more complete. And I tried to reinterpret the concept of endothermic fire; starting from a consideration of real physics, of course, but without any pretense of realism. I was just inspired by a concept; Is a surrealist "real" because in his deformed and absurd painting he was inspired by real objects? I don't think.
In short, I was just trying to find a more suggestive explanation than "why yes" :]

[Monkey Cups]

Lighting black flames is how you get the town of Salem cursed by witches.

I don't see anything wrong with the blue.

[Pop Guy]

2 hours ago, Monkey Cups said:

Lighting black flames is how you get the town of Salem cursed by witches.

I don't see anything wrong with the blue.

Blue is very wrong instead, the most wrong could be done, really wrong.

[MondayNight]

The simplest explanation why, visually, we have yellow-orange-red associated with the exothermic process and gray-blue-white linked to the endothermic process is common chromatic symbolism for hot and cold. Regarding the cold aspect, snow and ice (white and/or bluish hues) is way more common in day-to-day temperature range experienced by people than high white flames occurrences, thus the mentioned common chromatic symbolism associated with it. And current color scheme is fine for a cartoony game. More so as we got the black flames tied to Night Light and the Nightmare domain (mentioned in previous comments).

[ArubaroBeefalo]

5 hours ago, Pop Guy said:

Blue is very wrong instead, the most wrong could be done, really wrong.

now is wrong... i cant xD